Contrary to what Oreskes and McKibben believe, unearthing the thoughts of Exxon scientists from the late 1970s and 1980s illustrates a tendency among some scientists — even those in the pay of an oil company — to be prone to alarmism and to overstate what is known. Predictably, Oreskes and McKibben draw a different conclusion, one entirely unsupported by the evidence. Had Exxon been up-front about the dangers of global warming, we might have started to decarbonize decades ago, Oreskes argues. Instead, Exxon had behaved like tobacco companies who had “long delayed” public understanding by suppressing the truth about the deadly nature of their products.
Sen. Whitehouse (D-RI): 'In 2006, Judge Gladys Kessler of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia decided that the tobacco companies’ fraudulent campaign amounted to a racketeering enterprise...The parallels between what the tobacco industry did and what the fossil fuel industry is doing now are striking.'
Heartland Institute reviews debate: 'Morano brought the facts — relentlessly and firmly. Andress was criminally uninformed for someone in her position. She spent so much time stammering, everyone who is a part of EDF or supports it should be embarrassed.'
Two Democratic lawmakers held a briefing Thursday to argue that climate change skeptics use similar arguments and tactics to those who believed that tobacco and lead are not harmful. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Rep. Henry Waxman (R-Calif.) said similar conservative interests have been behind many of movements that have been discredited,
Pielke Sr.: 'The AAAS report is even worse than the AGU and AMS Statements (and I thought that would be hard to do)' -- 'They also ignore the recent recognition of the heightened importance of natural climate forcings and feedbacks.'
Rips AAAS for linking Tobacco to CO2: 'The science linking human activities to climate change is analogous to the science linking smoking to lung and cardiovascular diseases.' show that this report is just political theater. There are no health benefits from smoking, only health risks. CO2 is required for life on Earth including plant growth and function...to directly COMPARE to the health risks of tobacco demeans the scientific stature of this who make such wild claims.'
The Harvard Crimson:A Harvard Medical School committee voted last month to embed climate change into the school’s curriculum. In a meeting early last month, the HMS Educational Policy and Curriculum Committee voted unanimously to officially add climate change and health as a theme in the HMS M.D. curriculum. ... The new climate change curriculum will examine the impact of climate change on health and health inequality, applications of these impacts to clinical care, and the role of physicians and health institutions in arriving at climate solutions. ...
Caleb J. Dresser, a Climate and Human Health fellow at the Harvard School of Public Health said: “It’s been developing for years, as more and more medical students and faculty members have started to engage with this issue and to see it as a really important context in which we are all practicing medicine.” ... “It’s going to be increasingly important for people in leadership roles in healthcare and other industries to integrate climate change and climate-related hazards into their strategic decision-making as they lead organizations.”
HMS student Madeleine C. Kline said: “Every student who comes through the Medical School will leave with an understanding of what climate change is and what it means for their patients,” she said. “I think it is going to mean a lot for their patients.”
The COVID-19 pandemic wasn’t all bad, a new Biden admin plan to fight climate change argues: It at least “highlighted major opportunities” to reduce travel demand and lower carbon emissions through “remote work and virtual interactions.” The plan—which President Joe Biden’s Environmental Protection Agency and Energy, Transportation, and Housing departments released in January—aims to “eliminate nearly all greenhouse gas emissions” from the transportation sector by 2050, mostly through a transition to electric vehicles. Also included in the plan, however, is a controversial call to reduce “commuting miles” through “an increase in remote work and virtual engagements,” including in education. ...
Jazz Shaw of Hot Air has a prediction: "I can’t shake the feeling that this brings us one step closer to a declared “climate emergency.” You people can all stay locked down in your homes voluntarily to save the polar bears or we can declare an emergency and lock you down like we did during COVID."
NY Post: Experts are now recommending that doctors reduce their use of certain kinds of anesthesia in order to combat the effects of climate change. Dr. Mohamed Fayed, a senior anesthetist at Detroit’s Henry Ford Health, made the suggestion during the American Society of Anesthesiologists’ annual conference last Friday in Orlando, Florida. “Global warming is affecting our daily life more and more, and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions has become crucial,” he said. Dr. Fayed added, “No matter how small each effect is, it will add up. As anesthesiologists, we can contribute significantly to this cause by making little changes in our daily practice — such as lowering the flow of anesthetic gas — without affecting patient care.”
Research notes that inhaled anesthesia accounts for up to 0.1% of the world’s carbon emissions, which are regarded as the primary driver of global climate change. An hour of surgery using an inhaled anesthetic is equivalent to driving as many as 470 miles, according to a 2010 study.
Flashback 2020 Study in American Cancer Society Journal in 2020 Fretted over ‘carbon footprint of cancer care’ - ACS Journal: "Climate change and cancer" - Excerpt: "To date, no studies have estimated the carbon footprint of cancer care...The energy expenditure associated with operating cancer treatment facilities and medical devices, as well as the manufacturing, packaging, and shipment of devices and pharmaceuticals, contributes significantly to greenhouse gas emissions in cancer care...Some cancer treatment facilities have begun to consider their own carbon footprint and started a process to achieve carbon neutrality."
Climate Depot's Morano: "Here is a question for the American Cancer Society: If you need cancer treatment, would you go to a cancer treatment center that was worried about its carbon footprint? Or one that was worried about delivering the best possible modern care possible?"